“Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears” is a blog series documenting the harmful impact of President Trump’s judges on Americans’ rights and liberties. It includes judges nominated in both his first and second terms.
.
What’s at stake in this case?
A woman sought to recover damages for harm inflicted by use of excessive force during a traffic stop.
What happened in this case?
During a traffic stop in Nashville, Tennessee, Officer Terrance Stuckey arrested Naya Abbey. She later filed a federal civil rights suit for damages against him for use of excessive force.
According to her complaint, Stuckey followed her for several minutes before finally turning on his flashing lights and siren. She had been driving safely. But after she pulled over as directed by Stuckey, he and another officer emerged from their car “with firearms drawn, yelled at Abbey, removed her from her car, searched it, held Abbey to the ground, handcuffed her, and placed her in their car.”
As a “direct result of driving-related charges against her,” which did not lead to a conviction because the police testimony was later found to be false, she “lost her job and her home and could not secure” a new job or housing. She then suffered “malnutrition, physical and sexual assault, battery, and exposure to the elements.” This all “took a toll on her physical heath and cost her the loss of a pregnancy and then the death of a newborn.”
The district court dismissed the claims against Stuckey, and Abbey appealed to the Sixth Circuit. Trump judge Eric Murphy wrote a 2-1 decision in July, joined by Clinton judge Guy Cole, which affirmed the ruling against Abbey and dismissed her case. Clinton judge Eric Clay dissented in the ruling in Abbey v Metropolitan Government of Nashville. Murphy and Clay agreed with the district court that Abbey’s claims against Stuckey were filed too late, outside the one-year statute of limitations that applies under Tennessee law.
Why did Judge Clay dissent?
Judge Clay strongly disagreed with the majority concerning the statute of limitations. He explained that the record revealed an “inexcusable years-long withholding of exculpatory evidence,” in the form of dispatch tapes containing admissions and other statements by Stuckey, which “delayed the filing” of the lawsuit. He maintained that the court should have reversed the dismissal of Abbey’s complaint.
Why is the decision harmful?
The decision made possible by Trump judge Murphy obviously harms Naya Abbey, making it impossible for her to recover damages for the harm she suffered due to the use of excessive force against her. The ruling also sets a bad precedent concerning statute of limitations issues in federal civil rights cases, especially in the Sixth Circuit, which includes Tennessee, Kentucky, Michigan, and Ohio. In addition, the decsion illustrates the importance of our federal courts to health, welfare and justice and the significance of having fair-minded judges on the federal bench.